Notes

Where could Luis (and Peter/Kian) go for legal advice?
Luis, Peter, and Kian should seek legal advice from a solicitor who specialises in personal injury or negligence claims. In the UK, solicitors are qualified to provide advice on civil matters, including tort law, which governs claims like this where one person suffers injury due to another’s actions. They could also approach the Citizens Advice Bureau for free legal advice or utilise online legal services to get a better understanding of their rights.

What non-court action could Luis take?
Luis could pursue alternative dispute resolution (ADR), such as mediation or negotiation, before resorting to court action. In this scenario, Luis could send a letter of claim to Peter and Kian, outlining the incident, the injury, and the compensation he seeks. ADR methods can be quicker, more cost-effective, and less formal than going to court, with the goal of reaching a settlement between the parties without litigation.

How much could/should Luis claim for?
Luis could claim for both special damages and general damages. Special damages would include his medical bills, rehabilitation costs, and loss of earnings due to being unable to play football. General damages would cover pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life. According to guidelines such as the Judicial College Guidelines for the Assessment of General Damages, the amount would depend on the severity of his injury and its impact on his career and daily life. Given that he is a football player, the loss of earnings could increase the compensation sought, potentially leading to a significant claim if his career is affected long-term.

If it goes to court, which court would it go to and what type of legal action/case would it be?
If Luis’s claim is for less than £10,000, the case would likely be heard in the Small Claims Track of the County Court, which handles minor disputes. For claims between £10,000 and £25,000, the case would be allocated to the Fast Track in the County Court, where cases are expected to be resolved within a day of trial. For claims exceeding £25,000 or more complex cases, the claim would be assigned to the Multi-Track, either in the County Court or, for higher-value or particularly complex cases, in the High Court. This legal action would be a civil claim for negligence under tort law, where Luis must prove that Peter and Kian owed him a duty of care, that this duty was breached, and that the breach caused his injuries and financial losses.

Are there any cases that might help Luis in his claim?
Luis’s claim would rely heavily on principles established in negligence cases. The case of Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) is foundational, establishing the concept of a duty of care owed to others. Luis could argue that Peter and Kian owed him a duty not to act in a way that could foreseeably cause harm. Additionally, Caparo Industries plc v Dickman (1990) provides a three-stage test for determining duty of care: foreseeability of damage, proximity between the parties, and whether it is fair, just, and reasonable to impose liability. The case of Bolton v Stone (1951) is also relevant as it dealt with foreseeability of harm; Peter and Kian’s actions may be viewed as reasonably likely to cause injury.

What forms would he need to fill in/file?
To initiate legal proceedings, Luis would need to complete and file an N1 Claim Form in the County Court. This form outlines the nature of his claim, the facts of the incident, and the compensation he is seeking. If Peter and Kian intend to defend against the claim, they would need to complete and file an N9A Defence Form. Both parties would need to provide relevant supporting documents, such as medical evidence, witness statements, and financial records detailing losses (e.g., lost wages).

How much would this legal action cost?
The costs involved would include court filing fees, which vary depending on the size of the claim. For claims under £10,000, fees are relatively modest but increase for larger claims. Solicitors' fees will depend on the complexity of the case, and Peter and Kian may also face legal representation costs if the case proceeds. If Luis is successful, he could seek to recover legal costs, though recovery in the Small Claims Track is generally limited. For higher-value claims, Luis may also face costs for expert witnesses or medical reports. Overall costs could range from a few hundred to several thousand pounds depending on the specifics of the case.

How could/should Peter/Kian counter this claim?
Peter and Kian could argue that they did not breach any duty of care and that their prank was not likely to cause injury. They might also argue contributory negligence, claiming that Luis’s own actions, such as how he fell, contributed to the injury, thereby reducing their liability. Froom v Butcher (1976) is a key case on contributory negligence, where damages were reduced because the claimant did not take reasonable steps to avoid harm. Peter and Kian could argue that Luis’s reaction contributed to his fall and injury.

Is Peter/Kian’s intention important in this matter?
In negligence claims, intention is generally not the primary focus. What matters more is whether their actions breached a duty of care. Even if Peter and Kian did not intend to cause harm, they could still be held liable if their actions were careless or reckless and led to foreseeable injury. The case of Nettleship v Weston (1971) illustrates this point, where the defendant’s lack of intention to cause harm was not sufficient to avoid liability when a duty of care was breached.

What do you think would be the result of this scenario?
If Luis can demonstrate that Peter and Kian’s actions were reckless and that they breached a duty of care, it is likely he will succeed in his claim for damages. Given that they intentionally scared him, it is reasonably foreseeable that such a prank could lead to an injury. However, the court may also consider whether Luis contributed to the injury through his own actions, potentially reducing the damages awarded based on contributory negligence. The final outcome would depend on the specific facts of the case and the evidence presented, but Luis would likely receive some level of compensation.

This case would most likely be heard in the County Court, under either the Small Claims Track, Fast Track, or Multi-Track, depending on the value and complexity of the claim.